Talk:Star Trek: Voyager
Syndication I was watching Star Trek Voyager from its initial release all the way up until the sixth season or so on television stations that were not UPN stations. I didn'teven get UPN until extremely late in the show's run and only in the very last season did I watch the program on UPN. Anyone who changes my additional sentence about syndication in the VOY article is wrong to do so. Blue Spider (non-registered user) 12:47 January 24, 2006 I also didn't have UPN in my area until about Voyager's sixth season. I don't remember what station it initially aired on, it might have been Fox or CBS (they aired DS9), but they were no longer able to broadcast it sometime around season three or four. My uncle would have his friend record it and then he'd mail us the tapes. --SwordfishII 17:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC) Sort Order The episode order presented here for season two is, arguably, incorrect. It shows the correct production order, but not the correct air order. Unless anyone has any objections, I will correct it. I will also add a note about the issues regarding the four episodes that were held back from season one. Alex Peckover 00:39, Aug 1, 2004 (CEST) :Hmm. On the TOS page, we also have the episodes listed by air dates, not by production number... Ottens 13:02, 1 Aug 2004 (CEST) :I think the four s1 holdovers should be separated, but the two groups (the s1 eps and then the bulk of s2) should individually be in production order. I'll do so. --Captain Mike K. Bartel 15:32, 1 Aug 2004 (CEST) ::I don't think some of the mid-season two episodes are in the correct order either. IIRC, "Dreadnought" and "Death Wish" should be next to each other. Alex Peckover 08:36, Aug 2, 2004 (CEST) When did Voyager End? (moved from Reference Desk) I know I've commmented on this issue too many times, but I think it needs to be sorted once and for all - in what year did ''Voyager'' return to Earth? It is, to my mind, obvious that it ended in 2378 - in "Homestead", Neelix comments that they're celebrating the 315th anniversary of First Contact - then clarified as the anniversary of Tuvok's ancestors arrival on Earth. This places the year of that episode and subsequent ones in 2378. However, throughout this site, the events keep being listed in 2377 - what am I missing? The reason I ask this again is that I'm on the verge of changing every reference to Voyager's return to 2378, but I don't want to if others keep changing it back or if I'm wrong. Help! -- MiChaos 17:57, 14 Aug 2004 (CEST) :You're right though.. we've confirmed that those episodes must indeed take place in 2378, however, many have missed the "Homestead" reference and continue to perpetuate the incorrect date. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 04:55, 15 Aug 2004 (CEST) What about the fact that each season in modern Star Trek history has been during one calendar year. The stardates begin and end in that calander year as well. I don't see why we should change are assumptions simply because of a single mistake in one episode. Anyone else with me?Ryan123450 08:13, 18 Aug 2004 (CEST) :I disagree. Find me any reference to the idea that each season takes place in one calendar year. I don't think there's anything really supporting that - in fact, starting a new year somewhere mid-season would solve more problems than it creates. This is an assumption as well, of course, but at least we shouldn't call something an "error" just because it doesn't fit our previous assumptions. -- Cid Highwind 10:04, 18 Aug 2004 (CEST) UPN link Rebelstrike2005 removed the link I'd put in for UPN. We've got a page for NBC (linked from TOS) — why not a page for UPN? --Josiah Rowe 18:32, 28 Mar 2005 (EST) a different world hi, i was searching through the place. but i cannot remember the episode where the crew of VOY are all kinda 'evil' where voyager has all sorts of weapons mounted on her and the crew allied with kazons as well as 7o9 was not made an individual... can anyone tell me which episode it is? thx 70.70.209.80 06:51, 12 May 2005 (UTC) :You're probably thinking of "Living Witness". It was kind of the Voyager version of a Mirror Universe episode, without it actually being a Mirror Universe episode. Randee15 06:53, 12 May 2005 (UTC) "Voy-Voy-a-ger....Voy-a-ger" Once read somewhere that something should go under "interesting points" on the series' main page, but I don't see anything like that. Where should I add... I read somewhere that the Voyager theme is actually a synthesizer saying "Voyager" over and over again. I listened to the theme, and it matches! The same three "syllables" over and over. Kinda' interesting... -AJHalliwell 18:24, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC) *Spooky, it does sound like that... *hides* --AmdrBoltz 18:43, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC) *Its true, it does sound like it, but only if you say it in your head! I thought they usually used real instruments rather than synthesised ones for the theme tunes to the star trek series'. zsingaya 20:38, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC) ::The Voyager theme was played by an orchestra under the direction of the now deceased Jerry Goldsmith. Editor3000 21:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC) * It also sounds uncannily like the 70s Gentle Giant song 'Think of Me With Kindness.' Almost cancelled? Was the series really on the verge of cancellation as some rumours state? Tough Little Ship 19:52, 24 Jul 2005 (UTC) I don't think it was on the verge of being cancelled, but the ratings were low. Excelsior 22:11, 24 Jul 2005 (UTC) :Yeah, Voyager (unlike early TNG, ENT, and all of TOS :-( ) was never on the verge of cancelation I'm pretty sure. - AJHalliwell 00:49, 25 Jul 2005 (UTC) :The ratings were never as good as they were for TNG or DS9 were they? -- Tacking Into the Wind 14:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC) Interesting I don't know if anybody noticed this or not, but at the beginning of the series, it is mentioned that it would take about 70 years at maximum warp to get back to Federation territory. The Intrepid-class is said to have a cruising speed of Warp 9.975, which, according to the TNG Warp Factor Chart, would place the actual time as closer to 18 years, and since the distance wouldn't be completely across the galaxy, closer to 15 years or so. For the time to actually be around 70 years, the maximum speed of the Intrepid-class would have to be somewhere between Warp 8 and 9. Although encounters with alien species and other events may slow the ship down somewhat, it is highly unlikely that such events would add over 50 years to the time. Comments? --Redattack34 20:41, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC) ::You've missed one significant detail about TNG era warp travel, however -- no starship has ever been shown to have a sustainable maximum cruising speed -- remember how the Enterprise-D had to shut down after a few hours at warp 9, and as the got up into the higher "warp nine-point-whatever" speeds, they could only maintain velocity for a lesser time before they had to slow down to avoid overheat? -- if Voyager went its maximum 9.975 for a few hours each day, it would still have to keep its speed down to warp 8-9 in order to keep its engines from overloading -- this is probably where the "70 years" figure ended up being derived from. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 20:58, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC) True. I hadn't thought of that, though by my math, the time would then have been approximately 60 years if they spent most of their time at warp 9, going to 9.975 for short bursts. I suppose, though, that even the relatively low warp 9 would put quite a strain on Voyager's engines, forcing the crew to slow down to warp 8 for part of the distance. --Redattack34 03:16, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC) ::I believe since Voyager wasnt outfitted to go very far in their first mission, they weren't stocked with fuel. So another problem with their top speed would have been that huge consumption of fuel (antimatter) and strain on various engine components (dilythium crystals, etc) --Funkdubious 20:14, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) :::Yeah, I agree: they had to stop to mine dilithium and trade for dilithium at least once each per season. 68.121.162.154 02:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC) ::You can't forget The Doctors quote from The Cloud, "Why do we even bother acting like were going home if were going to explore every meter of the quadrant?" Surely, that would tack a few more hunderd years onto their journey. Editor3000 21:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC) Linking text question Is there anyway to Link the text from the episode article to a table in this article? Perhaps since there's a standard template, some kind of module could extract from the Episode template... - Funkdubious 20:09, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) I've deduced that this function would require a bot. Here's the bot registration: User:EnEpiLink... Initially its a proposal for a bot that can link episode titles from the source episode articles. Makes it even easier since the Episodes have a standard template. -Funkdubious 20:55, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) :Update: active discussion progressing in Ten Forward--Funkdubious 18:55, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC) External links Is it really necessary to have a link to a Google video purchase page? --From Andoria with Love 03:42, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC) How many lightyears? Swedish wikipedia says 75.000, english wp says 70.000 and i always thought it was 60.000. Which number is correct? Slipzen 19:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC) In Caretaker, just after Voyager is swept across the galaxy, Harry Kim tells Janeway: "If these sensors are working, we're over 70,000 lightyears from where we were...we're on the other end of the galaxy." Bear in mind I've only watched Caretaker in English, though I would assume they'd use the same figures in all language versions! - MiChaos 21:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC) "Science vessel", but, maiden voyage = tactical? Is there any evidence for this sentence? "the Intrepid class Federation Starship Voyager was a ship built to return to Starfleet's founding principle of scientific exploration." It sounds made-up, especially considering its first mission: Go capture paramilitary rebels! I'm intersted to know where the statement comes from, if onscreen. Thanks to anyone who can inform 68.121.162.154 02:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC) VOY abbreviation On the official website, and in the Star Trek Encyclopedia, it is abbreviated as VGR. I don't know if this has been addressed before, but it does get confusing for me when I go from MA to the STE. I hope someone can help me clear this up, because it seems that VGR is more 'official' than VOY. Thanks to anyone that can help. --Nmajmani 20:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Nmajmani :We seem to have old talk pages for nearly everything nowadays... ;) In this case: Talk:VOY. -- Cid Highwind 20:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC) ::Thanks for the info --Nmajmani 21:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC) References in the summary I added in-line links. Still need more, if necessary, or should the relevant text be linked to the episodes in question? i.e. :a journey of at least 70 years I wanted to just use footnotes, like in User_talk:Deathlok007 -- this was mainly to support some phrases I put in, like the Borg treaty and the encounter with the Voth. --vorik111 16:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC) :Our style here on MA is to use all inline references and citations. The proper way of formatting the above reference would be to insert ( ) either immediately following the end of the sentence, or, if that would be unclear (i.e. if information in the sentence came from multiple sources), immediately after the information to be cited (in the middle of the sentence, just as you would a footnoted reference). -- Renegade54 16:29, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Yah, I've used the standard style in my first edit, anyway. Do we need to reference each and every phrase of that summary? It will probably hurt readability, and probably all episode references should be put at the end of the sentence, like my 2007-09-07 edits. That "over 400 species" bit was discussed elsewhere (don't remember where), but I think a reference would be good. Another weird effect of adding the inline reference is that the VOY part of it is bolded (probably because it is self-referencing "Star Trek: Voyager" -- I don't suppose that will need to be fixed, will it? Using nowiki didn't unbold the VOY. --vorik111 18:36, 7 September 2007 (UTC) :In this particular case, since the "VOY" link points to "Star Trek: Voyager", the MediaWiki software creates a bolded entry instead of a link to itself. So, for this specific instance, you'd probably be best using ( ) syntax for the citation. That'll get rid of the bolded "VOY". -- Renegade54 21:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Episode Summary I have a problem with the episode summaries for this series. They are all written far too personal. Also i don't see it necessary to give each main characters position and species in every single article --Marcos dax 15:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC) :Can you give specific examples? --OuroborosCobra talk 15:47, 31 October 2007 (UTC) Look at any of the episode summaries. Its always "Voyagers Commanding Officer, Captain Kathryn Janeway, Voyagers First Officer, Lieutenant Commander Chakotay. The summaries included personal observations of the characthers behaviour. Look, its just my opinion. Have a look yourselves. --Marcos dax 16:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC) ::We've had complaints about this before and have asked the user writing the summaries to tone it down a bit. I guess we need to do so again? --From Andoria with Love 19:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC) How Many People Made it Home? I have few questions that I can't seem to find the answer to. How large were the crew compliments of Voyager and the Maquis ship when they were still in the Alpha Quadrant? How many people were then on board Voyager when the newly combined crew set off after "Caretaker?" And finally, how many people actually made it home? ::The exact crew number is difficult to pin down, as the producers themsevles never established a single figure, but it seemed to be around 145-150. As to before going to the DQ, it is also difficult to figure out, but we do know that Chakotay's ship didn't have more than about 40, give or take. As to how many people actually made it home, we know that likely the Equinox five did, plus whoever was still alive in Endgame. Again, the exact number is hard to pin down.--31dot 00:22, 30 December 2007 (UTC) The Journey Home The one thing I've never understood about Voyager, which may be worth mentioning in the article is this. Voyager left DS9 after the events of Emissary (DS9), therefore they must have known of the existence of the Bajoran wormhole. Given that, surely it would make more sense for Voyager to have travelled from the Delta quadrant to the Gamma quadrant, then through the wormhole? This would have made the trip much shorter and safer. Besides the obvious explanation of this completely ruining the premise of Voyager, does anyone know why this was never mentioned in the show? -CmdrTim 16:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC) ::In terms of the show, they probably wanted to differentiate themselves from DS9. In terms of the Trek universe, they very likely would have had to travel through more Borg space and then Dominion space, assuming it would have been a shorter trip in terms of distance.(I think it would have been about the same) I believe there is very little canon information about the location of the Bajoran Wormhole when compared to Voyager.--31dot 00:22, 30 December 2007 (UTC) :::I think this was discussed somewhere else but I can't honestly remember where it was. I think it was suggested that The Idran system end of the Bajoran wormhole might have actually been somewhat further away than Earth from Voyager's position in the DQ. Still, as Voyager knew of the Borg, but not the Dominion, they surely would have thought it millions of times safer to travel through the GQ. Go figure. – Cleanse 00:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC) ::Voyager probably knew of the existence of the Dominion, if not their strength, power, or motives. The Odyssey was destroyed right before Voyager left. We also see Jem'Hadar fighters in a simulation on Voyager(in Learning Curve, I think)--31dot 00:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC) :: In Hunters, it is mentioned that the Maquis were wiped out by the Cardassians and an ally, which implies that they were not aware of the Dominion on Voyager. Its also mentioned by Chakotay that they know about the Bajoran Wormhole. Seems to me as if it is just a glaring inconsistency in the production of the show. -CmdrTim 16:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)